Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "How States Are Trying To Make The Popular Vote Determine Elections" video.

@hughmiller6389 , exactly. Every state has different issues and cultures to deal with. Just because one state has a lot more people doesn't mean they should have a much louder voice. The EC is a balance where larger states get more votes, but there is a limit. It allows smaller states to have a say. Kyle clearly failed at political science when it comes to the EC, or he is just avoiding talking about things on purpose. The EC is the best system we have. It prevents larger states from bullying smaller ones.
6
@Surrealist4Hire , the federal government is there to serve the states, not the people. That is why the EC exists. The EC gives larger states more votes, but it limits them. Thus a handful of states cannot run the country. People talking about the one person one vote don't understand how cultures are different in each state. Just because the Bay Area in CA is really blue does not mean the entire state of WY should have to be punished. Thus the EC votes for CA are limited. In each state you have different cultures. Thus the states decides the president, not the people. People really need to try to understand why the EC exists and not just brush it aside. To me those who push hard to remove the EC are, in my opinion, ignorant on the issue.
3
@melodyx9637 , people in Los Angeles have a completely different culture than the people of AL. Just because more people live in the city of LA does not mean they should have a louder voice overall. The EC limits their voice. The EC is vital to the success to our nation.
3
@melodyx9637 , a lot of people in rural areas don't attend college, so they don't have student loans. Many government programs, like the min. wage, harmed rural areas because they never had the resources to pay higher wages to begin with. As for education, education is not a high priority for them so you can invest a lot in education in rural areas and it will be a waste. In infrastructure, those roads get beat up a lot, prepare to spend a lot of money. Based on your comment I bet you never spent more than 10 minutes in a rural area and actually got to know the people there.
3
@melodyx9637 , it may be depressing to you but others are fine and don't want to be bothered. You saying "starving wages" is about all I need to know about your experience in economics. Define "starving wages". If they are starving why aren't they dying from starvation? And no, rural people are not cut off from the cities with cars and transportation today. I grew up in rural areas, I know how people act there. They are not depressed and they really don't have problems that want to be fixed. You are an outsider looking in.
3
People's lack of understanding of the EC is scary
3
@campnou69 , that pretty much how the left thinks today. If their issues are not being handled than the federal government should solve it as opposed to solving it locally.
3
@frontierbrainrobby5449 , grouping it by state is the balance. Not saying it is ideal, but states is where it starts. States elect their own governors through a democracy and dictate the direction their state goes. If someone doesn't like it they can rally to change how their state runs or move to another state and remain a US citizen. So no, it isn't ridiculous.
3
Ok, and? Who cares. The people don't elect the presidents, states do. Learn history.
3
At the federal level it shouldn't be
2
@RJLiams the far left view others as beneath them
2
@hughmiller6389 , exactly. Removing the EC would be letting larger states bully smaller ones. That is why the Senate exists, to prevent larger states from bullying smaller ones.
2
This is dumb. Now the citizens if those states no longer have a voice
2
difference of culture
2
@medic2831 , the federal government is there to serve the states, not the people. Thus the states elect the president, not the people. That is the point of the EC. States vote, democratically, for their own governor. The idea of the EC is to prevent a few states from overpowering other ones. The nation was designed to have government but to place many limits on government. The EC is a part of that.
2
@frontierbrainrobby5449 , climate change is a complex issue. The people of the coast should learn to manage it themselves. Just like the people in the midwest manage tornadoes. The reality is that the people of the Midwest don't understand how the people in CA live, and vise versa. So why should not group dictate the lifestyle of another?
2
Every person getting an equal vote is not the correct principle as the states decide the presidential elections, not the people.
1
The EC is the best system we can have
1
@frontierbrainrobby5449 except people aren't the same due to different cultures
1
@frontierbrainrobby5449 , they essentially do. You have county cities and towns. For example, school districts are mainly ran by the county. Local police departments are ran by the city.
1
@frontierbrainrobby5449 , sure, and that is up to your state. That is the point. If you state wants to do that than that is up to your state. That is how this nation was designed. There is a desire to have government, but the role of government differs depending on the culture. Thus the powers were given to the states.
1
@frontierbrainrobby5449 , so the little guy shouldn't get a say? That is literally what you are saying. The Senate was there to give smaller states a voice. I always thought the left was all about protecting the little guy?
1
@frontierbrainrobby5449 , you said the senate is bullshit
1
The EC is where the states decide. This bill simply takes away the option of that state and ultimately the people of that state
1
Nor they shouldn't. Doing this will mean the people in that state don't have a voice. Imagine this, your state votes republican but the democrat wins the majority, so your state gives the EC votes to the republican. How would you feel? Your vote literally means nothing now.
1
Democracy is 51% telling 49% what to do. It is essentially the majority bullying the minority.
1